Voting turnout by investors at European companies’ annual meetings has risen above 50% for the first time on record, as shareholders increasingly make their opinions heard on directors’ handling of the crisis and its aftermath.

Figures from Manifest, a shareholder adviser, show the average turnout at companies in western Europe’s main eight blue-chip indices hit 51% in the year to the end of July. In 2006/07 the figure was just 40%.

The agency’s Europe-wide records only go back three years. However, evidence from individual countries confirms the rising trend. Manifest’s figures for the UK reach back as far as 1996, and this year’s FTSE 100 turnout, at 68%, was also the highest it has on record.

Cas Sydorowitz, a managing director at proxy solicitation adviser Georgeson, which works with companies on shareholder voting issues and trends, said the recent spike in turnout could well have been caused by the turmoil that engulfed the financial sector.

He said: “In our experience, the financial firms have seen a huge increase in their turnout numbers this year. That is not only people expressing opposition on issues like executive remuneration, it is also thanks to the large number of corporate transactions and capital raisings that have had to be put up for shareholder approval.”

George Dallas, director of corporate governance at F&C Asset Management, said he viewed the rise in turnout positively. He said: “Those who have become involved this year are unlikely to step back. More institutions will feel pressure to raise their game. In future it should not be just the same 15 or so investors.”

Sarah Wilson, chief executive of Manifest, agreed that the financial crisis had played a role but pointed out there was also a longer-term trend toward increasing voter turnout.

Disclosure of share-voting records was made compulsory for US mutual funds a few years ago and for certain French funds last year. This discourages them from staying away, as they must explain that to investors.

But Wilson also warned that compulsory voting was not always informed voting: “There is a risk that if governments force or strongly encourage voting, investors will simply vote blindly – either automatically in favour of management, or in line with the recommendation of a particular proxy adviser.”

The UK government has so far shied away from requiring fund managers to disclose their votes, though several fund managers do so voluntarily. Lord Myners, a Treasury minister, has, however, made several recommendations this summer for improving investors’ engagement with companies.

These include instituting different classes of shares, with only those available to long-term holders carrying voting rights, and allowing investors to sell voting rights, if they do not want them, to peers more committed to corporate governance.

Reaction to the ideas from fund managers has been skeptical. F&C’s Dallas said: “What he has suggested so far won’t work; separating ownership and control is unhealthy. But to give him credit, Myners is coming up with ways to get people thinking about ways of getting involved.

Dallas added that voting shares is not the only way to influence management for most institutional shareholders. He said: “They have direct access to company boards and a lot of engagement is done that way.”

Some investors are considering drastic action in order to exercise more influence over companies. The €78bn ($112bn) Dutch pensions giant PGGM Investments is considering a cull of the number of individual shares it owns – from over 4,000 down to 400 – in order to concentrate its equity holdings in companies where it thinks it can make a difference.

A spokesman for PGGM said: “One of the main reasons is to have more influence over those companies in which we invest – we are currently discussing with this with our clients.”

The investment firm has steadily increased the number of companies it has engaged with over corporate governance issues. In 2006 it only spoke with a third of companies it held shares in, but by 2008 this had grown to almost half. It is also voting more – from 19% of its companies’ AGMs in 2006 to 92% in 2008.